Grey Area of McKay Deal?

[FuzzyDuck]

A player comes to Rovers for a couple of months, plays then leaves (back to parent club, on to another loan or short-term  deal).  Nothing more happens for a month or two, then he gets a big money deal.  Will  Rovers still get there cut?  When  do we not get our cut?

If the player gets a big move from Donny - ok  but if it comes after his time with us has finished?

[fudgepacker]

Then we have the use of a decent player for a couple of months. If they are good players and get us winning games then I who cares!!

I guess the link up with the French sides means that Mckay will act as the players agent whatever happens so he will get the money regardless, plus technically we would have been the shop window for the move even if it's a couple of months after.

[markusparkus75]

I'm fairly certain they'll have thought of this in the contract.

[hoolahoop]

I'm fairly certain they'll have thought of this in the contract.

Yep of course 'Diamond' Dave would have thought the lot of this out.

[Mr1Croft]

These are (according to McKay) players who will not be happy at their parent club, they may have poor fitness levels, low morale and may be a little rusty.

Suppose 3 or more of these players arrive from difference areas; now not having a go at Dean Saunders but if he is struggling to find a team blend after bieng here for a month how are we gonna cope with 4 or 5 comings and goings at the club every month?

It will be imperitave that the loans play games as well because if not then they are not in the shop window and our \"adevertising\" fee goes down the drain.

So basically DS may be pushed to play the loans more than our own players and lets face it untill 2 months the loans are gonna struggle here unless they are very versatile, but with that in mind any half decent player who is adaptable shouldnt be unhappy at his parent club.

[Wellred]

Are you seriously implying that there will be 4 or 5 new arrivals per month?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

We're a month into this now and we've had 2 arrivals (which we needed given the players we had out in those positions).  We've also had trialists who have not been given deals because they haven't been seen as good enough.  So far, it's not done bad if anything we haven't brought enough players in to stop the inherent weaknesses in midfield for example.

[Mr1Croft]

We have had 3 if you include Kirkland who was an arrival and that never really worked out.

And all 3 so far have been from English clubs, McKay told the press he would be looking overseas mostly, so can we really say we are a month into this??

[dickos1]

Think people are arguing for arguings sake now. Some of the posts are ridiculous. Yes were a month into this, its black and white, yet your still trying to argue facts.
As has been posted numerous times before we arent signing everyone that Mckay is suggesting just the ones saunders wants. we needed a left back and we needed a goalie.
People now are just coming on here and talking absolute garbage just to convince themselves and others that theyre are right. When really as every day goes by theyre views are looking more and more inaccurate...

[Mr1Croft]

Think people are arguing for arguings sake now. Some of the posts are ridiculous. Yes were a month into this, its black and white, yet your still trying to argue facts.
As has been posted numerous times before we arent signing everyone that Mckay is suggesting just the ones saunders wants. we needed a left back and we needed a goalie.
People now are just coming on here and talking absolute garbage just to convince themselves and others that theyre are right. When really as every day goes by theyre views are looking more and more inaccurate...

Nothing yet is set in stone though, so what you say isn't really fact either, its not about arguing it's about giving each individual a chance to have their say.

It's neither a question about being right, everyone on here wants to see this football club suceed, but that doesn't mean we have to bow down and smile about everything the club does, that would make us supporters meaningless robots, we have the right to express our opinion on here.

No one has said were going to sign someone every day so it doesn't make either side of the debate more inaccurate, both sides of the arguement are giving the possible scenario's and yes I admit to put my veiw across I have considered it from an extreme scenario; just you like you have considered it from an extreme point of veiw; and both veiws are written in the same context to explain our arguements; but on opposing sides.

Just because someone has a different opinion to yours does make you superior; this is a public forum and you have no right in attempting to make the opposing side seem stupid by saying they \"talk absolute garbage\". I have opposed this and expressed my veiws but I have not reverted to insulting those who oppose me in an attempt to try and make them shut up.

[dickos1]

I'm not intending to insult, but at the minute all the negativity is all guess work. The facts are that we've got 2 new players in our squad at this current time. And I wouldn't say they've been disruptive at all. In fact both players played very well at Blackpool which was arguably our best performance if the season.
I just think we should argue the toss if and when all these players come in, and I probably won't be arguing with you then. But at the minute the outcome everyone is worried about hasn't happened so think we shouldn't be so negative especially 48 hours before the biggest game of our season so far..

[Bristol Red Rover]

These are (according to McKay) players who will not be happy at their parent club, they may have poor fitness levels, low morale and may be a little rusty.

Suppose 3 or more of these players arrive from difference areas; now not having a go at Dean Saunders but if he is struggling to find a team blend after bieng here for a month how are we gonna cope with 4 or 5 comings and goings at the club every month?

It will be imperitave that the loans play games as well because if not then they are not in the shop window and our \"adevertising\" fee goes down the drain.

So basically DS may be pushed to play the loans more than our own players and lets face it untill 2 months the loans are gonna struggle here unless they are very versatile, but with that in mind any half decent player who is adaptable shouldnt be unhappy at his parent club.

There's no reason to suggest DS will be pushed to play loan players, its up to them to make themselves good enough for the first team squad. As I see it, the idea of Donny getting some money if they do get sold on is a sweetner for us to give them a chance and try and get them to their optimum, but I think thats not about *bribing* them into the squad.

Loan players coming in now will be available for transfer in Jan. After that, they must wait till the end of the season - thats not monthly loans in the main.

Its an interesting system that will need practise to make work for us, but its not that different from having loan players in the normal way.

[benaldo]

Can you imagine Mackay saying to a prospective loanee \"Right, you are off to Doncaster Rovers, they might not even give you a game, but you'll get into trilogy\"....??!

I would imagine that you don't offer these \"Stars\" an opportunity to be in the shop window without actually putting them in the shop window? Players will soon stop coming if they get to Rovers and end up warming the bench, it won't further their careers one bit will it?!

These loanees WILL be playing.

[ravenrover]

I just don't get all the negativity around \"Oor Willie\" and his transfer/loan deal. If the players are good enough DS will play them, if not back they go. What does it matter to us, the fans what the machinations of the financial side of it are, it's none of our business. All we have to worry about is whether our team wins the next game and the one after that etc. The current squad aren't good enough at this level, this season, and needs strengthening and if this policy manages that then I am well happy. I don't really care if we play the same 11 players or 111 by the end of season as long as come next May we are inat least, 21st position in th final league table, I seem to remeber we were up in arms about the likes of the Bellamy deal, I was one of them, but the boots on the other foot now and I fully support it providing the newcomers are better than what we have already got.
All that really matters to me is that come 5.00pm every Saturday, or 10.00pm every Tuesday that chap on the radio says that we have scored at least one more, or as many as the other team we have just played. I can't understand the business about \"well I don't mind if we lose as long as we play well\" absolute BS, I want nothing more than to come away from the Keepmoat and say WE WON even if it was the dullest most boring game in my living memory, I don't want 3rd tier football I want to stay where we are and maybe, just maybe do a Blackpool one day.

[Mr1Croft]

I'm not intending to insult, but at the minute all the negativity is all guess work. The facts are that we've got 2 new players in our squad at this current time. And I wouldn't say they've been disruptive at all. In fact both players played very well at Blackpool which was arguably our best performance if the season.
I just think we should argue the toss if and when all these players come in, and I probably won't be arguing with you then. But at the minute the outcome everyone is worried about hasn't happened so think we shouldn't be so negative especially 48 hours before the biggest game of our season so far..

Can't say I disagree with that too much, I see where your coming from and fully accept your veiw.

The thing is though when something happens like this it's give us all something to talk about, and we're all queueing up to say how we think it is going to pan out. Those both for and against have done this, and although the amount of threads and posts is quite alarming at how many times people have posted about the subject; I'd rather us be debating about what the future holds than a very empty forum.

I just can't see why people who have different veiws can't express them without starting to dis-like someone, and this is not aimed at you dickos either, but to say there has been no tension between posters on this forum in the last week is similar to saying the 81 rebel MPs on Monday did not affect the stability of the government.

[Bristol Red Rover]

Can you imagine Mackay saying to a prospective loanee \"Right, you are off to Doncaster Rovers, they might not even give you a game, but you'll get into trilogy\"....??!

I would imagine that you don't offer these \"Stars\" an opportunity to be in the shop window without actually putting them in the shop window? Players will soon stop coming if they get to Rovers and end up warming the bench, it won't further their careers one bit will it?!

These loanees WILL be playing.

That doesn't add up Benny.

They will be picked to come if they seem good enough, and they will play if they earn a spot in the squad. If they're not good enough to play for our team, they aren't going to be bought by Stoke or whoever are they?

They will know that they have to perform, its not a route for slackers, they are being given an opportunity to turn their fortune around. Its more than likely that we'll end up with very hungry loanees.

[Mr1Croft]

Can you imagine Mackay saying to a prospective loanee \"Right, you are off to Doncaster Rovers, they might not even give you a game, but you'll get into trilogy\"....??!

I would imagine that you don't offer these \"Stars\" an opportunity to be in the shop window without actually putting them in the shop window? Players will soon stop coming if they get to Rovers and end up warming the bench, it won't further their careers one bit will it?!

These loanees WILL be playing.

That doesn't add up Benny.

They will be picked to come if they seem good enough, and they will play if they earn a spot in the squad. If they're not good enough to play for our team, they aren't going to be bought by Stoke or whoever are they?

They will know that they have to perform, its not a route for slackers, they are being given an opportunity to turn their fortune around. Its more than likely that we'll end up with very hungry loanees.

Of course that is how it should happen BRR, but maybe it might happen differently; to me there are two factors;

1) If McKay got Saunders the job; and
2) If McKay makes his money is made from the 'sell on fee' (ie not under contract of a flat rate job at DRFC)

If both are correct than I fully agree with Benaldo with the scenario: McKay will push Saunders to try and make him play the loanees so he gets his share of the money if it's a sucess, we have no proof he has no interest of Doncaster Rovers claiming sucess he has publicy said it's all about the money; so why should we not beleive it?

If it they aren't getting played they may decide (or have it decided for them) to go home; look at Kirklad he was here for a couple of days, once the injury stopped him getting any chance of 'in the shop window' he ran back to Wigan and now claims he is happy there.

We don't know but it looks likely for this model to work financially speaking; they need to play for us to get the sell on fee